Pethokoukis

Obama adopts the Geithner Defense: No solutions, he just knows he doesn’t like Romney’s

Image Credit: World Economic Forum (Flickr) (CC BY-SA 2.0)

Image Credit: World Economic Forum (Flickr) (CC BY-SA 2.0)

With the nation $16 trillion in debt, a jobs gap that isn’t closing, falling incomes, and declining competitiveness, this is President Obama’s agenda, as explained during last night’s debate with Mitt Romney:

And what I want to do, is build on the five million jobs that we’ve created over the last 30 months in the private sector alone. And there are a bunch of things we can do to make sure your future is bright.

Number one, I want to build manufacturing jobs in this country again. Now when Governor Romney said we should let Detroit go bankrupt. I said we’re going to bet on American workers and the American auto industry and it’s come surging back.

I want to do that in industries, not just in Detroit, but all across the country and that means we change our tax code so we’re giving incentives to companies that are investing here in the United States and creating jobs here.

It also means we’re helping them and small businesses to export all around the world to new markets.

Number two, we’ve got to make sure that we have the best education system in the world. And the fact that you’re going to college is great, but I want everybody to get a great education and we’ve worked hard to make sure that student loans are available for folks like you, but I also want to make sure that community colleges are offering slots for workers to get retrained for the jobs that are out there right now and the jobs of the future.

Number three, we’ve got to control our own energy. Now, not only oil and natural gas, which we’ve been investing in; but also, we’ve got to make sure we’re building the energy source of the future, not just thinking about next year, but ten years from now, 20 years from now. That’s why we’ve invested in solar and wind and biofuels, energy efficient cars.

We’ve got to reduce our deficit, but we’ve got to do it in a balanced way. Asking the wealthy to pay a little bit more along with cuts so that we can invest in education like yours.

And let’s take the money that we’ve been spending on war over the last decade to rebuild America, roads, bridges schools. We do those things, not only is your future going to be bright but America’s future is going to bright as well.

Obama, shorter: stop Benedict Arnold CEOS, more clean energy industrial policy, and implement the Buffett rule.

That’s it, really. I mean, good heavens, if those are the answers, “How should America deal with its structural economic problems and create jobs?” can’t possibly be the questions.

And those, of course, are the questions. Again, I am reminded of when Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, testifying before the House Budget Committee, told Chairman Paul Ryan the following: “We’re not coming before you to say we have a definitive solution to that long-term problem. What we do know is we don’t like yours.”

Obama seems to have adopted the Geithner Defense during this campaign season.

But what did the president say, what agenda did he layout that would deal with the jobs gap:

Additional Image Credit: AEI (red text)

Or the economic growth gap:

Or budget gap:

Not much, I’m afraid.

43 thoughts on “Obama adopts the Geithner Defense: No solutions, he just knows he doesn’t like Romney’s

  1. Romney and the AEI creed: “government doesn’t create jobs, the private sector does.”

    Romney and the AEI in the debate: “I have a policy to create jobs.” (Its a tax shell game but never mind)

    It can’t be both.

    By the way, Jim, I know your obsession over corporate tax rates is sheer porn for you, but as someone who knows the bond market, there are companies out there turning in their 10% coupons for 5% ones without breaking a sweat. The private sector is gonna come of this gleaming like a diamond. You will never see deleveraging like this in NINE lifetimes by industry.

    • It flew right over your head–no surprise.

      Romney’s plan to create jobs–millions of them–is to get out of the way and create a friendly business environment that permits private business to create jobs. Regulation rollbacks and tax cuts top his agenda.

      Your inability to understand capitalism, free markets and profits unambiguously disqualifies you as a serious and intelligent poster.

      You are stupid.

      • “Romney’s plan to create jobs–millions of them–is to get out of the way and create a friendly business environment that permits private business to create jobs. Regulation rollbacks and tax cuts top his agenda.”

        Rubbish- there hasn’t been enough or any regulatory legislation passed that “restricts” business activity, unless you’re in favor of 40 to 1 leverage for brokerage houses again. This meme is horsecrap. The “environment” isn’t holding the economy back- 30 years of leverage is.

  2. One point completely missed in the quality job creation formulas of both candidates is the fact India and China graduate more engineers each year than the rest of the world combined. For me that implies we will forever more be competing with both India and China for jobs. Short of excluding their products from the US market, how do we ensure we can compete?

    • Excellent point, and a very timely one. Since the loss of manufacturing jobs over the years and the increase in financial ones, as our economy went into another direction, demand for people with math and analytical skills were lured to Wall Street. Let’s face it, even a mid level trader or a second rate quant makes a good deal more money than an engineer.

      Perhaps, with our manufacturing base going through something of a renaissance, and with the financial sector shrinking dramatically, things will change.

        • Your IQ is showing–and its nothing to be proud of.

          Your racist belief that more racism is the solution would make George Wallace proud.

          • I would love to see any of you breast beaters spend ONE hour as a Black person in this country.

            You would cry like a baby.

        • Typical, play the race card when the facts don’t support the inane position…

          jack‘s point was NOT excellent max but far from it…

          One reason why Chinal and India alledgedly graduate more engineers is due to their higher population counts…

          Are either Chinese or Indian compamies burdened by the extortion racket of the 10,000 Commandments?

  3. I have to admit, I busted out laughing when President Obama admitted to being corrupt on national TV, and then went on to say that a major part of his plan was to continue to be corrupt.

    I am referring to his “I want to build manufacturing jobs” comment, combined with his stance on the auto industry. It is not the president’s job to decide which industries thrive and which die. In fact, that is the essence of corruption.

    No wonder why corruption is so rampant throughout the US government. Our politicians brag about being corrupt, and then we just vote them back in.

    • “I am referring to his “I want to build manufacturing jobs” comment, combined with his stance on the auto industry. It is not the president’s job to decide which industries thrive and which die. In fact, that is the essence of corruption.”

      Once again, a stunning display of ignorance.

      • Speaking about ignorant, do you know that GM shares have to trade at about 53 in order for morons like you to break-even.? Do you know that GM builds and sells more cars in China and hires more people in China than it does in the USA? Did you know that the bulk of their expansion plans are not in the USA, but in China?

        But then again, you are probably among the 47% who pay NO income taxes and therefore don’t give a damn.

        • I am well aware of the break even point, thank you, and the fact that an AMERICAN company is SUCCEEDING IN CHINA is something to be proud of. Chevrolet is the #1 nameplate in the world, and more Buicks are sold in China than the USA.

          That’s what happens when you sell into a market with over FIVE TIMES THE POPULATION, YOU PATHETIC BIRDBRAIN.

          • Corruption: noun – Using a position of power to favor one group, usually at the expense of another (Source: Merriam Webster).

            Barack Obama is in a position of power and he has said he wants to favor manufacturing and he favored the auto industry (Source: debate last night).

            Q.E.D., Barack Obama is corrupt. This can also be used for Mitt Romney, has he generally said similar things at the debate and on the campaign trail.

          • Mr. Murphy, for someone who claims to be an economist, you are one walking joke. Governments have been “picking winners” since Ninevah and Tyre existed.

            When the railroads were seen as a way to build commerce and aid expansion, government played a role. When the automobile replaced the trains, government “picked a winner” again.

            Could you imagine Eisenhower refusing to build the interstate system because he didn’t want to be seen as “picking a winner?”

            Thats as good an example of how off the wall loopy the GOP and its legions of ignoramuses have come.

            We make decisions like this all the time, and we will for all history. Sometimes right, sometimes wrong, but WE WILL DECIDE. Again, this is the infantile narcissistic fantasy of today’s so-called “free market” demagogue. Everything happens all by itself!

            Never has.
            Never will.

            Me, I’m sorry the old trolley systems that served the streets of New York are gone. They were great, and you never had to worry about parking.

          • This can also be said for the vast majority of our government. A reason why I am a major advocate for limited government is how thoroughly corrupt our government is. Any government, including a limited government, will inherently become corrupt. The trick, then, is how to contain that corruption. When the government has control/influence of many different aspects of the lives of its citizens, that corruption can spread quickly. When the power and influence of government is limited to only its most basic functions, then the corruption is contained.

            One of the things that can make a democracy more susceptible to corruption is that the voting citizenry can become corrupt. They can use their position of power (as the ones who choose the leaders) to compel other members of the citizenry to give them some of their wealth.

            By creating a binding legal contract, a constitution if you will, than the twofold ability of a corrupt government and corrupt citizenry to spread their corruption is severely curtailed.

            The important thing to remember about a democracy is that the politicians do not represent “the people.” The laws passed in a democracy are not “the will of the people.” The laws of a democracy represent the will of at least 50.1% of the people who voted. The people who disagree with the law are still compelled to obey it. Thus, the corruption spreads.

            Now, I know someone is going to create a strawman and say I am being undemocratic. No. Aside of the stench of McCarthyism that attack presents, I am not abolishing democracy. Just acknowledging some of its flaws.

          • All you are saying here is that governments have been corrupt since the beginning of time. There is no surprise there.

            For the record, I am not GOP. I am a liberal, back from when it meant something.

          • This is just childish…….

            “Corrupt?” A GOVERNMENT is “inherently” corrupt? Are you this brainwashed?

            The private sector isn’t corrupt? You think the private sector is nominally LESS corrupt than “government?”

            Then you’re kidding yourself. Again: childish. Naive to the point of infantilism.

          • Uh, I’m a bond professional, dope, and have been one for over a decade“…

            Thanks for the warning, now I’ll know where NOT to take my money…

          • No, I do not think the private sector is any less corrupt at all. The difference is you can choose who you associate with in the private sector. You can choose which companies you buy from, which people you hang out with, which diners you frequent. The inherent corruption in the private sector is limited because their influence is limited.

            With the government, you are told who you will associate with. Don’t want health insurance? Too bad, you’re buying it. You would like to smoke a Cuban cigar? Too bad, you can’t. You want some cheap tires made in China? No way, you’ll buy the tires we want you to buy.

            Government corruption is more dangerous than private sector corruption in that the can compel you, by threat of force, to do as they wish. That option is not open to the private sector. Wal-Mart cannot compel you to shop there. Nike cannot compel you to buy their shoes. HP cannot compel you to buy their computers. Donald Trump cannot compel you to gamble in his casinos.

            Corruption is a part of life. We all know people who have done bad things, and we all have done bad things ourselves. We are all human. But we should not become complacent about it. To sit back and say “it’s ok because it’s always been that way” is foolish and it makes it easier for the corrupt to expand their power. One of the things that allows the corrupt to thrive is community indifference. Our attitude should not be “governments have been picking winners and losers since Ninevah and Tyre existed, and therefore it’s ok that they do this.” Our attitude should be “governments have been picking winners and losers since Ninevah and Tyre existed, and therefore we must limit their powers.”

          • I am getting a little off track from my original point, but anyway:

            (By the way, Mr. (Dr.?) Pethokoukis, I apologize for hijacking your blog right now)

            Governments have a long history of being corrupt. You have the extreme cases like Nero or Stalin, but also the more benign like Mr. Obama’s sweetheart loans to green energy companies or Mr. Bush’s subsidies to oil. Governments are rife with corruption.

            Some have described me as an anarchist. That is hardly true; I do favor limited government, but government does have a role (specifically defend rights, enforce contracts, and defend the borders). However, I do think the anarchists have the upper-hand in the argument. No anarchist murdered six million Jews. No anarchist drove native people off their land. No anarchist waged a holy war. No anarchist started a war which claimed 78 million lives. As far as I am concerned, the burden of proof rests with the government. They have done a terrible job proving their case thus far.

          • “No, I do not think the private sector is any less corrupt at all. The difference is you can choose who you associate with in the private sector. You can choose which companies you buy from, which people you hang out with, which diners you frequent. The inherent corruption in the private sector is limited because their influence is limited.”

            Yeah, its a good thing that Lehman, Bear, AIG and Goldman didn’t affect us in any way.

            Hard to believe I’m talking to adults sometimes….

          • You’ve yet to do anything to disprove my point.

            You’ve yet to even contradict my point, for that matter.

            You’ve not even disagreed with me.

            You really have no idea how to respond to me, do you?

            You’ve pulled a Joe Biden (or did Joe Biden pull a Max?). You have nothing to say to contribute to the conversation, so you just snicker and belittle, hoping (at the very least) to not say something foolish.

            If you wish to add something of value to the conversation, than please do. Otherwise, please go away and let the adults talk.

          • No, sir, it was YOU who deflected when I asked you my question about Eisenhower and picking winners.

            You then wandered into the “corruption” lane, so I obliged you. It had nothing to do with your original point.

            I love how you fancy yourself the bright guy, when you’ve been hammered repeatedly. Go for it.

  4. Geithner is currently planning how to cheat on his taxes–and get away with it this time.

    Obama is still trying to figure out if there was a terrorist attack in Benghazi.

    Both guys are assh0ies

  5. GALLUP DAILY TRACKING POLL OF LIKELY VOTERS:

    ROMNEY-51…OBAMA-45

    POST DEBATE, THIS A.M. ROMNEY MOVED UP FROM 50 YESTERDAY TO 51 THIS A.M– THAT’S UP +1 FOR YOU LIBS.

    You can’t win a debate if you get caught lying…and Obama got caught lying. He paid a price.

    • Rubbish- there hasn’t been enough or any regulatory legislation passed that “restricts” business activity, unless you’re in favor of 40 to 1 leverage for brokerage houses again. This meme is horsecrap. The “environment” isn’t holding the economy back- 30 years of leverage is“…

      On what planet is this happening on max?

      Get a grip on reality: The Cost Of Government Regulation

      • I assure you my grip is more assured than anything you will know in your lifetime. From the article:

        “A simple perusal of the Federal Register shows over 430 rules costing over $65 billion so far this year alone, let alone the entire Crain universe of rules, which stops at 2008. As the Crains note, regulatory costs are often “indirect,” compared with direct taxation.”

        $65 billion in regulation is nothing in an economy the size of the USA’s. But what do they mean by “cost?” If it means a textile plant has to install a million dollars of equipment so it’s untreated water discharge doesn’t foul a lake or a stream, that may well be a “cost.” But its a damn necessary one.

        This is how people like you have been so whipped into your mindset. We don’t need a government at all, ALL regulations are nonsense and get in the way, and if we get rid of both, we will all be prosperous.

        Nonsense.

        • max claims: “$65 billion in regulation is nothing in an economy the size of the USA’s“….

          LMAO! Funny how since its not your $65 billion then it means almost nothing…

          If it means a textile plant has to install a million dollars of equipment so it’s untreated water discharge doesn’t foul a lake or a stream, that may well be a cost“…

          Says who? A corrupt EPA?

          Yeah, I can see reality isn’t your friend…

  6. Romney now 52-45…nobody ever lost a 7-point lead with only 18-days left. Its over.

    This tax-cheat is gonzo…An Ivy will hire him to teach Failed Financials-101.

    • That’s pretty funny calling the current President a tax cheat, when his opponent probably used a tax amnesty and has most of his money overseas.

      There is only one reason for a person to do that- to hide assets. And its despicable that someone running to LEAD the US would cheat his own country.

      Sick.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>